Sunday, May 17, 2009

I'll be on Suicide Girls radio tonight at 1 AM Pacific Time. Listen live on the Internet or later on the podcast. It should be interesting.

This morning I lead Zazen and spoke at the Dharma Punx/Against The Stream place on Melrose in Hollywood. That was fun as usual. Noah was even there, which he wasn't the last time I spoke.

So for my topic I chose to start out talking about a comment I saw in this blog. Yeah, I peeked in again. But I'm not making a habit of it. Why, you ask? Because I saw one comment that said Brad cannot stand criticism and will only be satisfied when every commenter is a sycophantic clone. So I went looking for some of this intelligent criticism and what do I see? A guy telling the world how Brad Warner is not a "real punk" (oh yeah?). He grew up in the "rich suburbs of Cleveland, Ohio" and did not suffer like Noah Levine did.

The rich suburbs of Cleveland, Ohio? Do you guys even read back the things you write before you shoot them off into cyberspace? Cuz Cleveland, Ohio is just rolling in cash, you know. As is Akron, whose suburbs I actually did grow up in (Akron is not the same city as Cleveland, please use Wikipedia for further clarification).

Noah seemed amused. I know I was. This is like the fourth or fifth time I've seen postings warning readers of this blog not to be fooled by phonies like me but to turn to the real deal, Noah Levine instead. I sure hope nobody is putting similar comments on Noah's forums urging people to go to me instead.

Anyhow, the point I was trying to make was that there is no Universal Scale of Suffering by which we can determine who has suffered more and who has suffered less. In fact this is a particularly insidious idea. The idea that some forms of suffering are more worthy of compassion than other forms of suffering is one of those absurd notions that makes people miserable.

I used to suffer from massive headaches on a regular basis. At the time it never occurred to me that they could be caused by stress and depression. After all, here I was in the "rich suburbs of Cleveland" -- actually living in a room at the Kent Zendo, working shit jobs to barely make the absurdly low rent. I'd never had leprosy. I wasn't dealing with a heroin addiction. I had not been abused by my parents. What could I possibly have to stress about? The only real stress was the kind that made for a good TV Movie of the Week. Or at least an Afterschool Special.

So I did not deal with my own stress and depression. And as a result I spread that stress and depression to everyone I met.

Don't judge your feelings by the standards of others.

Anyhow, it was a real good session and I got some good questions. Mainly the topic was about how Zen differed from Vipassana. I don't know much about Vipassana. So I just talked Zen.

Zen is at once the least popular practice in Buddhism in the US today and the most talked about one. Folks are terrified of Zen, and yet fascinated by it at the same time. But, really, it's not that scary. It's not very warm and fuzzy, I'll grant you that. But the scary stuff you've heard is mostly exaggeration.

The Buddhist Channel has an article by Brad. I haven't seen it linked here, so here you go. Despite the provocative title, it's all about the E-word.

Brad, I love you, but sometimes you can be an ass. Everyone gets criticized. Everyone, whether they deserve it or not. The better known you are, the more criticism you'll get. If the criticism is undeserved, IGNORE IT. By responding to it you're just prolonging its life. If you did something that deserves criticism, say you're sorry and move on. Don't waste your time over trivial stuff.

(Posting anonymously only because I don't have a Blogger account, not anything mysterious.)

This post made me giggle, because I recall seeing some reviews of Noah's books on Amazon saying exactly the opposite, that if you want the "real deal" you need to read Brad's books. (To put this in perspective, one of the reviews was taking "Dharma Punx" to task for being too much about Noah's life and what happened to him and so on. Apparently missing the words "A Memoir" on the cover. And the title page. Heh.)

It puzzles me that anyone would feel so attached to something that they'd slag the other thing as being somehow bad. Why the mutual exclusivity? Brad & Noah, seems to me, are a coupla fellas saying, essentially, "This worked for me. Might for you. If you wanna check it out, great. If not, cool." Is this, perhaps, an "American" thing? Where we feel compelled to compete, and just can't let be? "NO! You can't find satisfaction and your own truth there! That's bad and wrong!"

Brad v. Noah...Zen v. Vipassana...my dharma v. your dharma...it all smacks a bit too much of teenaged girls arguing who's better on American Idol instead of just enjoying the music. Only we're talking about something more important than music here.

Oh, well. I like 'em both, and if I find something either of them says to be true for me, and helpful to me, all the better for me and for everyone I come into contact with. Good times.

Warner reads the comment. He's probably going to read this comment. Which is fine but geez, it's just a tad silly for a grown man to pretend like that.

And he's right; because he found a half-baked comment, nobody has ever intelligently disagreed with him.

For whatever it may be worth, my opinions of Warner and Levine are about the same. Both are decent teachers in their own ways who would benefit from dropping all the 'punk' baggage. Buddhism is to a large extent a deconstruction of the individual, and identities like 'punk' just get in the way of that. Besides which, middle aged men (as Warner and Levine both are) who still identify as punks tend to look a little silly. When I see that mohawk-sporting Buddha the Dharma Punx people have, I don't feel offended on any primal religious level, I just feel a sort of incredulity.

Their backgrounds don't figure into this ,like, at all. Warner's dead on that assesing things through some sort of hierarchy of suffering is ridiculous. Anyone who is obsessed with comparing their life experiences could just as easily come to the conclusion that Warner was smart enough not to get hooked on hard drugs.

"Passive-aggressive personality disorder is a condition in which a person may seem to comply with the desires of others, but actually passively resists them. In the process, the person becomes increasingly hostile and angry."

I will not single out Jundo or one of the Brits, because it is only waking the nest.

Brad reads the comments once in a while and doesn't enjoy the experience. Would you expect him to? Would you? Would you read them every once in while anyways, while still not enjoying it? I might.

I've met and sat with Noah a couple of times, and I've read his books. He strikes me as a good person who found the solutions inherent in his own problems and shares that. He's friendly, well-spoken, and he seems to know what he's talking about. I'm amazed at how well he's grown and maintains his group. I think the Dharma Punx are doing good things in the world, and wish them well. But I'm not into the closed eyes, the focused attention, or the talking of insight meditation, and prefer shikantaza.

Tavvi, you McNailed Mysterion. But I think the Johnny Crap image used as the cover of SD&SU is way cooler than the DP one. A giant mohawk-sporting Buddha, riding a fire-breathing monster and destroying a city. This is where the guitar solo goes.

I think comparing Vipassana and Shikantaza Zazen can be quite valuable. I've started studying to teach a form of therapeutic meditation (MBSR/MBCT) which is based on Vipassana/Insight Meditation. I've also practiced it with Theravadan monks at the local Buddhist group and once at a temple in Bangkok.

The way I see it at the moment is that they are like sisters. The essential spirit is the same - non-striving, non-involved awareness in which we see phenomena arise and pass without identifying with or reacting to them. Vipassana is like a powerful searchlight - attention is narrower and more focussed, while Zazen is like a flare lighting up the nighttime darkness - attention is broader and generally only directed when it is caught up in thinking. Vipassana seems to be better for clearly seeing the details - the specifics of how we identify with thoughts and feelings and the body etc, and with seeing the workings of the mind and how the attention gets hooked. Zazen seems to be better for seeing the whole picture, for a sense of wholeness, non-separateness, emptiness.

There are some forms of vipassana which involve labeling. I've not had much luck with that type since, for me, the labels are concepts which make the experience a bit.. well, conceptual.

But I don't think it's a case of either/or. There is already a meditation within this form of insight meditation called 'Choiceless Awareness' which corresponds pretty much exactly with Shikantaza as far as I can see. I think they compliment each other very well.

I can only guess to whom you refer, but I am an anonymous brit who was once accused by you of being passive-aggressive. I'm here most days, in one anon form or another. And we still, occasionally, cross swords. That you thought I/we had gone away suggests, does it not, that your characterisation might be flawed. Not that it matters - call me what you like. But I think you may mis-read dismissive brit sarcasm for p-a. You say tomato...

Speaking personally, my motivation was rarely other than hostile, but my intent honest. On the very rare occasions when you engaged with me without your hypertext mask of condescending superiority, it was only to throw some toy out of the pram or sling a puerile insult across the pond. That you never really got my goat - I think you're most likely a charming fellow in RL - may account for the intermittent hints of affection I displayed towards you, affection that you probaly hear as p-a. There again, just as likely that, in RL, you're an irritating, pompous prick.

So there you go - I hope I've been able to rekindle some bitter-sweet memories.

While I agree we are all guilty of judging whether someone's pain is worthy of our compassion....my question is...how can we not? If a spoiled 16 year old heiress is driven to suicidal thoughts because her Daddy won't get her the pink BMW... or if my significant other howls with despair because her brownies burn... I'm sorry, but yes, I do judge that they are overreacting and being self indulgent. As you say, Brad, in your recent book, your life is not your own: if I am depressed or overemotional then I am imposing this mood on those around me. When someone is imposing their moods and freak outs on me, for things that by any logical standard is not worth it....I find myself getting impatient or shutting down. I don't want to validate the reaction by matching their level of concern. Can the compassionate thing be to *not* react to them, to let them flail in their own pain, or is that simply being a holier than thou douchebag?

To previous Anonymous: You make a good point. While there is no objective standard for judging the depth of suffering, this alone does not mean that some forms of suffering are superficial compared to others. However, there are two things at play in both instances you mentioned. The first is that both the heiress and your significant other experienced what I am going to generously label “suffering” because of their circumstances. The second is that both of their sufferings resulted because they expected more out of life than was reasonable. They expected, for whatever reason, for their wants, in addition to their needs, to be supported, without working to provide it for themselves. Therefore, you’d be doing them a favor, not to mention yourself, to ignore them. Since they are not truly lacking anything in their lives, their suffering would eventually wane and things would go back to “normal.” Attempting to be compassionate would only prolong their self-inflicted suffering. Although, if your significant other is in a bad mood, even if you think she’s being ridiculous, for the sake of your relationship I would suggest you not tell her that. Just a friendly suggestion, there. But not the philosophical point.However, at the same time, if there is someone truly experiencing emotional pain, regardless of the reason, I believe it is right to be compassionate toward them. This may mean different things on a case-by-case basis, but the essential goal should remain the same: to ease suffering in those around you and yourself. But I may have a different opinion of this than those around here, since I’m actually a theist instead of a Buddhist. Since it is impossible for humans to have a perfect perspective of any given situation, we are always incapable of judging someone else’s actions or thoughts. But if our own thoughts and actions are always compassionate (or at least, you know, as much as possible) we don’t really have to worry ourselves about everyone else’s superficial expectations of the universe. Wow. Sorry. That was long.

Brad. Duuude! So with sesshins, meditation groups, and all the balancing of the the Autonomic Nervous System going on....one post in this comment section and it all goes to pot! Man! Somethin' aint working.

"The rich suburbs of Cleveland, Ohio? Do you guys even read back the things you write before you shoot them off into cyberspace? Cuz Cleveland, Ohio is just rolling in cash, you know. As is Akron, whose suburbs I actually did grow up in (Akron is not the same city as Cleveland, please use Wikipedia for further clarification)."

Brad, I went to Wikipedia and found this. You claim to have grown up in a suburb of Akron, Ohio.You actually grew up in Wadsworth Ohio. Wadsworth is not a suburb of Akron. It is not even in the same county.In 2007, the median household income in Wadsworth was $58,723, compared to the US median which was $51,680. The median income for a household in Akron is $31,835. The racial makeup of Akron was 67.22% White, 28.48% African American, 4% from other races. In 2007, the racial makeup of Wadsworth was as follows: 97.0% White; 0.5% Black; 0.2% Native American; 0.9% Asian; and 0.3% Other.You might be technically be from Akron as you were probably born in Akron City hospital.But the truth is you were raised in an affluent community.

For the record, I sit every day, often twice a day, and have done for a few years. While I'm not in a postion to evaluate Gudo's theory that zazen is balance of the ANS - so it doesn't matter one way or the other to me - Gudo's teaching is the only teaching I've had direct experience of, via one of his Dharma-heirs, and it's the "buddhism" that makes sense to me. For me, it totally works. That's MY definition of works - the only one that matters.

The who;e Zen/Vipassana debate is one of my favorites to weigh in on, because it's a pointless argument.Think of it this way-Vipassana is like being taught to swim by your kindly grandfather. First he gives you water wings and holds you, then says, "kick your feet like this, now move your arms like this, okay now I'm gonna let go for a little", etc., etc., etc.Zen is a lot more like your crazy Uncle Bob who tosses you in the ocean and yells, "Swim for it Steve-o!"Either way you learn to swim.I just happened to have been tossed in the ocean(okay, it was actually a bay) by my Uncle Bob at an early age, so Zen it is for me. But that's just one way:)

So the conlusion of your carefully researched thesis is that Brad grew up in an "affluent" community; they weren't starving. Kinda average, I guess. And Brad says he didn't grow up in the "rich suburbs of Cleveland, Ohio".

To Anonymous at 1:37,Knowing nothing about Cleveland, Akron, or Wadsworth I can't speak specifically on that.However, I grew up in a suburb of Philadelphia. Now, I don't have numbers, but I would guess that the stats were about the same on paper(except maybe the racial ones-we had a high Asian population) as the ones you gave for Wadsworth, and I'm here to say it don't mean shit unless you know a person's specifics.ANY town has good areas and bad areas. If the good areas bring in a higher income it raises the average income of the town.Also, WHITE DOES NOT EQUAL MONEY OR PRIVILEGE!!!!I'm sorry, and I lost a (black)friend with this argument, but white folk can be poor too. My family did food stamps and welfare and got neighborhood donations at christmastime.Also, white does not equal WASP- Jews, Italians, Greeks and Armenians all had their own ghettos where I grew up. So race don't mean shit, and anyone who says it does is a racist.Anyone with kids will try to bring them up in a good neighborhood. That's just the way it is. If that means moving into a neighborhood beyond your means, then sometimes so be it.My dad did. He moved from crimefilled Southwest Philly to the suburbs so that his kids could have something better, and to this day he still can't pay his mortgage or bills on time, but dammit none of his kids have been shot or joined a gang or worse.

So, go to any public school in a decent neighborhood and look around. That kid in the bobos and Goodwill hand me downs is still a local kid, but I'm willing to bet cash money that noone likes him and his bpb lunch was funded with food stamps.You can't know the truth until you see it!

Sorry if that was a bit of a rant, but I can't stand it when people assume that because someone's white and grew up in a suburb that they've had some easy life of privilege. Bullshit!

So my question to the Wadsworth haters is- what's your f**king point?

Plus where he was raised has nothing to do with his later life.There are a few upper-middle class kids I grew up with who can now barely afford a studio apartment. Just cause your parents have money doesn't mean they'll give you any. And just cause they had it then, doesn't mean they have it now.

Because you write in riddles and pronouncements, I find it difficult, often impossible, to know what you claim/say/mean. Maybe if you once in a while emerged from behind your occasionally funny, but usually incomprehensible mask of pseudo-erudition we could have a conversation. I don't think you'll do that. I think you'll maintain a safe, defensive distance.

PhillySteveInLA.. I don't really care where Brad grew up. I am interested in why Brad is portraying himself as a disadvantaged punk from Akron. He is exaggerating his story. Why would he do that?

He said:

"So for my topic I chose to start out talking about a comment I saw in this blog. Yeah, I peeked in again. But I'm not making a habit of it. Why, you ask? Because I saw one comment that said Brad cannot stand criticism and will only be satisfied when every commenter is a sycophantic clone. So I went looking for some of this intelligent criticism and what do I see? A guy telling the world how Brad Warner is not a "real punk" (oh yeah?). He grew up in the "rich suburbs of Cleveland, Ohio" and did not suffer like Noah Levine did.

The rich suburbs of Cleveland, Ohio? Do you guys even read back the things you write before you shoot them off into cyberspace? Cuz Cleveland, Ohio is just rolling in cash, you know. As is Akron, whose suburbs I actually did grow up in"

That is just misleading if not downright lying.. He is not from present day Akron. He is not even from any day Akron. He is from an affluent small town. He is exaggerating his past for some reason. Why?

P.S. I am not the guy who originally wrote "telling the world how Brad Warner is not a "real punk" (oh yeah?). He grew up in the "rich suburbs of Cleveland, Ohio" and did not suffer like Noah Levine did."

I don't feel like Brad has ever misrepresented himself.He never claimed to be poor or under privileged, just not rich or exceptionally privileged.And as for saying he's from Akron as opposed to Wadsworth, I think most people claim the closest city and/or the place they spent the most time as their hometown, as opposed to the town their house was in when they were a kid.I grew up mostly in Upper Darby and Ridley in PA ( yes, my dad lived in the city for some time, but my parents were divorced and I lived mostly with my mom- I don't want to be accused of exaggerating MY life), but went to high school and hung out in Philly, as well as moving there when I left my parents'. When anyone asks me where I'm from, the answer is inevitably Philly- and I say it with no hesitation or feeling of dishonesty.

And have you met many punks?I've seen people grow up with more money than god and still turn to the punk ethic. Even rich folk can get disgusted with the corporate machine and turn their backs on it. Being disadvantaged is not a pre-requisite for being punk. But I digress.

I think that Brad has only ever portrayed himself as a fairly normal dude with a fairly average American upbringing(except maybe the living in Africa part) who also happened to get into punk rock music and find a place in that world and also somehow fell into Zen along the way.

We don't all have to suffer the same to know suffering, and we don't all have to be destitute to have street cred.

Are we still really arguing over whether Warner was sufficiently working class as a teen? I mean, really? I'm pretty free with the criticism and I still find that sort of asinine. Leave aside for a moment that 80s Hardcore was, in America at least, overwhelimgly a middle-class, suburban scene (all the urban tough guy posturing notwithstanding). Leave aside that it's an argument over shit from decades ago. I haven't seen Warner play up any kind of 'disadvantaged youth' thing. I guess it would be a legitemite gripe if he had a persona based on working class drag like Kid Rock or Bill O'Reilly, but if anything I'd think a more legitemite question would be why the whole punk angle when he apparently spent about 15 years with no connection to punk rock? All of this is assuming we're going to even bother asking such questions instead of just assesing him as anything other than what he primarily presents himself as, a writer and a Buddhist teacher. I personally find him somewhat interesting but not terribly impressive on both counts. But none of this has anything to do with how close his house was to Akron city hall as a kid.

Brad is annoyed because some reader thought he lacked street cred. He then responded to him by telling us that Akron is not exactly rolling in cash. That is not exactly the point. The point is that Brad spent very little time actually living in Akron. Akron was poor, Brad wasn't. But that isn't important. I think the fact that he is trying to pad his punk résume by misrepresenting his circumstances is.

I guess the question is really this:Who gives a fuck????He's a punk a mod a rocker a skin head a hordcore kid a S.H.A.R.P a Goth a Buddhist a Muslim a Jew a Catholic a Christian a Trekkie a fan boy a geek a gamer a bouncer a milk man a painter a hooker a baker a fireman an operator a doctor a congressmen a sheep fucker a cowboy an M.C. a steam punk a cyber punk a writer a jogger a biker a fish monger a televangalist a ball shagger a strongman a bitch a cop a lover a theif a cook a wife a pussy a hero etc, etc, etc.... He's just some cat with some knowledge. He is neither a saint nor a sinner. He is just some cat who took a path and talks about it. Dig him. Don't dig him. It's all the same. Throw jabs at him, or anyone for that matter and they mean nothing. Talk shit until the cows come home. It won't really make you feel better in the long run. Just adds to a world already full of shit talkers. I don't think the world needs any more shit. We , as in the human race, have all the shit we can handle. I have said my piece. Now commence talking shit about this post....if it makes you feel better.Peace, Joshua

Actually, if you pay attention to the books, he has spent quite a bit of time living in Akron and the area and he NEVER CLAIMED TO BE POOR!!!He's merely claiming to not be rich and not live in Cleveland.Not rich does not equal poor, it just means not rich- y'know, just one car, enough money for three meals, a roof overhead and utilities. Y'know. Average.

Can someone explain to me how that is some horrible ploy to claim false street cred?

And with that said, I'm done. Out. This is too much pointless arguing for me, but I somehow can't stop myself- no more looking at the comments for Steve!

It doesn't matter where a person is from! But Brad has said that he believes he has to be famous to make a living as a writer. If he is fudging the truth in order to appear more interesting, in order to sell more books, then it does matter a little, at least to Brad.

I think the point that Brad was making was that there is no universal scale of suffering and that the problem with having one is that it causes you to not deal with the particular form of suffering YOU carry. As a result, you "spread that stress and depression" to everyone you meet.

By sitting, these "scales of suffering" are brought to light (sometimes we don't even know we have them) and we see the importance of letting them go.